BBC flexes muscles for survival course

After hasty revisions by new director general Mark Thompson, the BBC's much delayed pitch to have its charter renewed was finally published last week. Building Public Value is strong on intent and broad principles but weak on detail. Two key issues - programme supply and commercial activity - are kicked into the long grass with a promise of later review. These are both touchy subjects. A poor relationship with the independent sector, a hangover from the Dyke era, continues to overshadow programme commissioning and there is still angst in the commercial sector about the extent and transparency of the BBC's very energetic commercial arm, Worldwide. The canny "under review" option also gives the new team, Thompson and chairman Michael Grade, more time to work out where they stand.

But what is striking about the document is the extent to which the BBC has embraced many of the criticisms levelled at it in recent years. After a decade of marginalising arts programmes on its main channels, culture is to take a prominent role on both BBC1 and BBC2.

Four years ago current affairs flagship Panorama was cut back and pushed into its Sunday ghetto slot; now it could be restored to prime time. Programmes like Fame Academy, until recently defended as an essential part of the Corporation's responsibility to provide something for all licence payers, are henceforth to be banished from the schedule. Imperial ambition, a hallmark of successive BBC managements since the 1960s, is now officially sated though there are, as yet, no plans to dismantle any components of an empire on which the sun never seems to set.

On the one hand, these about-turns are a recognition that the BBC in a land of plenty - digital multi-channel for all - has to be different and more distinctive than the BBC in a five-channel terrestrial universe. On the other hand, they could be viewed as a cynical calculation of the minimum it might take to secure charter renewal and retain independence. On past evidence the promises in this document will bear little resemblance to the services that will actually be delivered throughout the life of the new charter. After all, the initiatives which are now deemed to be inappropriate were all introduced under the last one, many of them under the leadership of the then director of television, Mark Thompson. But eschewing cynicism, there is one plank of the new manifesto that really could make a difference and ensure that the BBC protects itself from embarrassing governance cock-ups and policy u-turns in the future.

The proposal to create a clear separation of governors and management, with a more transparent system of governance underwritten by specific remits for each service, is a long-overdue reform which I believe is now a pre- requisite for a strong BBC. Many of the Corporation's recent difficulties have been due to weakness in governance. The sheer scale of the modern BBC and the complexity of the broadcasting market demand a more sophisticated and expert system of corporate governance than that which so ineptly handled the Gilligan/Kelly affair. One of the positives to come out of that is a widespread recognition within the BBC that reform of governance needed to be central to any charter renewal process.

As that process unfolds over the coming months it is important that this issue is robustly examined and the distance between the board and the management is sufficient to protect the public interest properly. As the marketplace bites and commercial public service is stretched, the BBC is more important than ever to the broadcasting ecology and to our broader national culture. The proposals on expanding its regional role - with the promise of a further £1bn invested outside London - are very welcome, especially as these are underpinned by plans to devolve commissioning power as well. This comes not a moment too soon. With the ITV production powerhouses decimated by consolidation and with further cuts to regional programming on the cards, Britain's regional production infrastructure needs the ballast that only the BBC can provide.

The Corporation has calculated what it needs to do to secure a renewal of its charter with the licence fee intact. It is in the survival game and there is a good deal of real politicking running through these proposals. By occupying the public service high ground, embracing regionalism and imposing a limit on its ambitions, it should have done enough to answer the critics and fend off the more radical solutions put forward by David Elstein - the abolition of the licence fee, the introduction of subscription instead, and privatisation of the BBC's programme-making arm. The BBC is most definitely not up for that lot. No doubt it hopes Building Public Value will save it from this fate worse than death.

Sign up for the Guardian Today

Our editors' picks for the day's top news and commentary delivered to your inbox each morning.